Speaker 1: Today's show sponsored by Lear Capital, the precious metals leader
Speaker 1: since nineteen ninety seven and only company I trust and
Speaker 1: recommend to my family, friends and viewers. Visit Lear Alex
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 2: He's editor in chief of Breitbart News and a New
Speaker 2: York Times best selling author, and on this podcast he
Speaker 2: brings deep research, prescient analysis at.
Speaker 3: World class guests.
Speaker 2: He's Alex Marlow and this is the Alex Marlow Show.
Speaker 1: Emma Joe Morris is here for her weekly visit with us.
Speaker 1: We had a lot to talk to you, Am about.
Speaker 1: Let's start with the I think the biggest thing that's
Speaker 1: jermaine to our corner of the media ecosystem, which is
Speaker 1: these revelations that the Southern Poverty Law Center was sending
Speaker 1: money to the far right, but not really far right,
Speaker 1: just sort of rage bait racists, and that they may
Speaker 1: have even been astroturfing some of the most famous events
Speaker 1: of deep racial unrest and hatred the Democrats have weaponized
Speaker 1: over the last several years in this country, and they've
Speaker 1: laid the predicate for some major Democrat campaigns, including Joe Biden's.
Speaker 1: We're talking about the Charlottesfield Unite the Right rally there's
Speaker 1: so much in this and again I want to be
Speaker 1: clear with the audience, it's a chicken and egg scenario.
Speaker 3: We don't know.
Speaker 1: Exactly if the SPLC just paid informants after the fact,
Speaker 1: or if they paid them too specifically gin up and
Speaker 1: animate the rallies, but we know what we expect it
Speaker 1: to be, and we certainly can read between the lines
Speaker 1: with the language that's coming out of the Trump administration
Speaker 1: that suggests that they believe pretty clearly the SPLC was
Speaker 1: astroturfing racial unrest and actually paying for the racial violence
Speaker 1: that we saw, which is very rare in this country overall,
Speaker 1: they were actually paying for it to occur.
Speaker 3: And it's just a monumental moment.
Speaker 1: We can't say enough about it, But give me your
Speaker 1: first of all, your overall take on it.
Speaker 3: Well, okay, well my overall take on it is. I
Speaker 3: know that I'm supposed to be like outraged and shocked,
Speaker 3: but you know, a leftist group making up racism in
Speaker 3: order to accumulate power and money, Like wow, how do
Speaker 3: like this is like the oldest and only kind of
Speaker 3: trick they have and it's just like another time that
Speaker 3: they did it. Like I know that there's been a
Speaker 3: lot of outrage on the right, and you know, fairly so.
Speaker 3: But you know, like I was just I was thinking
Speaker 3: about it this morning, and I'm like trying to like
Speaker 3: summon like rage and then like I'm you know, getting
Speaker 3: ready to come to my office, and I'm like, so
Speaker 3: can we agree that there were fine people on both sides.
Speaker 1: You know what's interesting to me about this with the
Speaker 1: your your point is that this does just confirm what
Speaker 1: we all knew was happening. And but hopefully I think
Speaker 1: it does open up some people's eyes to people who
Speaker 1: thought we were nuts for saying this, because this has
Speaker 1: been my experience over my entire career since I started
Speaker 1: at Bright part when I was in my early twenties,
Speaker 1: is that I'll believe something, I'll see it crystal clear,
Speaker 1: and then people will think that I'm crazy for having
Speaker 1: that thought. Like you could say that we'll talk about
Speaker 1: immigration later in the show, but you know, as someone
Speaker 1: who lived in La and saw LA deteriorate because of
Speaker 1: illegal immigration, and to see that the place became less
Speaker 1: it became more lawless, and that the school systems became
Speaker 1: less usable and the hospitals are more overrun, and for
Speaker 1: me to just say, yeah, that seems like a bad
Speaker 1: thing overall in general, and then people say you must
Speaker 1: be a racist for you to say that. And then
Speaker 1: ten years later I was like, oh, yeah, that was
Speaker 1: a good point. Yeah, that definitely was ruining the healthcare
Speaker 1: in the school system, Like, yes, of course it was.
Speaker 1: We weren't saying this to be crazy. And this whole
Speaker 1: thing with these astroturfed left wing agitation that we say
Speaker 1: the Soros funds of the protests, and we believe that
Speaker 1: a lot of the violence is astroturfed. And you see
Speaker 1: these footages from Charlottesville with the bed bathroom beyond tiki torch,
Speaker 1: and they look so stage and fake and gay. And
Speaker 1: then we just accepted it sort of, but I didn't totally.
Speaker 3: And then now we can look back at it, we
Speaker 3: can reappraise it. Yeah, well definitely, and listen, I mean
Speaker 3: I just maybe I'm like especially cynical about this because
Speaker 3: this is like kind of I feel like I work
Speaker 3: in this space where my work exists because of the
Speaker 3: aftermath of this, which exists all over the philanthropy industrial complex,
Speaker 3: which is kind of what I call it. And surely
Speaker 3: you've reported on it at Brightbart where this is exactly
Speaker 3: the play whether it be like you know, the Human
Speaker 3: Rights Campaign is another group that comes to mind that
Speaker 3: has a very similar playbook on the left, the institutional left,
Speaker 3: where they make up a problem and then they convince
Speaker 3: everybody that it's real and then they charge an exorbitant
Speaker 3: fee to solve it, and in doing that they rip
Speaker 3: apart the social fabric of the country. The HRC obviously
Speaker 3: in their case it's with regard to gay rights, and
Speaker 3: it's it's an extremely lucrative and extremely evil business. And
Speaker 3: I see this as basically the way that the modern
Speaker 3: life kind of stays institutional and stays wealthy. And I
Speaker 3: just see right through it immediately. So I saw this
Speaker 3: a SPLC thing, and I was like, yeah, like, obviously
Speaker 3: that's what they do. And obviously money goes to perpetuating
Speaker 3: the exact problem they claim to solve. You can't solve
Speaker 3: the problem because then what are you gonna do?
Speaker 1: So this is Yeah, it's an interesting thing that I
Speaker 1: always thought about this with. I wonder how some of
Speaker 1: my friends, the pro life movement we're doing after ROV
Speaker 1: way got overturned. You know, when you build your whole
Speaker 1: business around well, we got to overturn roe v way
Speaker 1: that if you do that, I wonder how the donor
Speaker 1: dollars turned out. And I hope people still don't into
Speaker 1: those causes because there's still so many abortions in this country.
Speaker 1: But overall, I always had that thought that it's interesting,
Speaker 1: like that's say, what do you do from that?
Speaker 3: What's you use at the top of the h that's it?
Speaker 3: Did you make up? You have to make up a
Speaker 3: new outrage? And it's so funny because I happened to
Speaker 3: have hung out with the Klan a year ago, and
Speaker 3: I find that it's funny to keep your eyes open
Speaker 3: when something happens to you in real life and try
Speaker 3: to compare it to what you thought based on like
Speaker 3: the propaganda you consume. And it was totally different. The
Speaker 3: audience may think I'm joking, but I'm not. It had
Speaker 3: to be in Arkansas, in Northwest Arkansas for work last summer,
Speaker 3: and while I was there, I ended up in clan
Speaker 3: Town somehow with John Levigne, of all people, and they
Speaker 3: assumed that we were married, which is a common assumption
Speaker 3: about me and John Levine that we get all the time. Uh,
Speaker 3: And so we just went with that and didn't reveal
Speaker 3: that we were like cosmopolitan, like gay Jews.
Speaker 1: So interaction has been on the show. Who's at the
Speaker 1: Washington Free Beacon now?
Speaker 3: So so, but tell me I was right to say
Speaker 3: I was in the middle of HQ and I wasn't
Speaker 3: seeing some sort of robust movement.
Speaker 1: So I did not have a lot of interaction with
Speaker 1: the Klan in my life, believe it or not. Despite
Speaker 1: the fact that our website Right Party has been referred
Speaker 1: to as like a safe space for neo Nazis, I
Speaker 1: actually don't have a lot of acquaintances growing up in
Speaker 1: West LA and living in Washington, d C. And you know,
Speaker 1: living in the Los Angeles suburb, not a lot of
Speaker 1: clan rallies around where I've ever lived. So, Emma phill
Speaker 1: Us in what's the clan like? Are they like the
Speaker 1: guys at the Unite the Right rally?
Speaker 3: Yeah? So, you know, I don't want to like, I
Speaker 3: don't want to be accused of doing clan apologetics on
Speaker 3: the show, but I didn't feel super threatened by them. Granted,
Speaker 3: I will obviously caveat that by saying that I look like,
Speaker 3: you know, if you don't ask me anything about what
Speaker 3: I'm about, which they didn't, then you know I could
Speaker 3: if you're incurious, you would never know that you hate me.
Speaker 3: So that was my experience. It was like very normal,
Speaker 3: except that they were proudly showing me a bomb manual
Speaker 3: and a swastika like magazine. Yeah. Yeah, I just ended
Speaker 3: up in a shop in I think it's called Harrisburg,
Speaker 3: Arkansas or Harristown or whatever. And I'd been not just
Speaker 3: driving and I and we stopped at the antique store
Speaker 3: and this woman was manning the store. She was an
Speaker 3: older lady, and she certainly wasn't menacing. She certainly was
Speaker 3: proud of obvious white terrorism. But that said, she wasn't
Speaker 3: being provocative, and she certainly didn't look like the photos
Speaker 3: and videos that we were shown. She certainly wasn't looking
Speaker 3: to make any sort of political point. She was it
Speaker 3: seemed like just sharing something that she felt passionately about.
Speaker 3: If I'm being totally honest and fair about my interaction
Speaker 3: with her, she wasn't. She wasn't like put like forward
Speaker 3: in a way. She seemed to not register how outrageous
Speaker 3: her political beliefs are. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Just what it's interesting to me is that we have
Speaker 1: always thought of at least a bright part that if
Speaker 1: the Klan was a real threat. They would have reached
Speaker 1: out at some point, like we would have had a
Speaker 1: conversation with them, and we would have said that, hey,
Speaker 1: you know, you're not welcome in our corner of the internet,
Speaker 1: but it's thanks for putting your hand up so we
Speaker 1: at least know you're not entirely fake.
Speaker 3: But now you get the SBOC thing. It took me physically.
Speaker 3: Have you ever even encountered them? Like that's a thing. Nothing.
Speaker 3: I couldn't name a Klansman other than David Duke. I
Speaker 3: get that.
Speaker 1: That's the hope I've been saying this, like I can't
Speaker 1: name a Klansman and that's the whole They don't have
Speaker 1: won who because you know, the media would have found
Speaker 1: that Klansman and made them a superstar. They would have
Speaker 1: done given the whole Nick Wents treatment. And it just
Speaker 1: reminds you, this is a whole thing. This shows you
Speaker 1: that with all of these people on the right, who
Speaker 1: are you know? And I'm not sure exactly what Nick
Speaker 1: went as his alchemy is specifically because he's a charismatic
Speaker 1: guy even though he's a racist, but he's if he
Speaker 1: was just like thought of as a stand up comedian
Speaker 1: I think people would understand him a lot better.
Speaker 3: But he says a lot of hateful stuff. I'm not
Speaker 3: trying to dismiss that.
Speaker 1: But overall, there's all these far rid voices that have
Speaker 1: clearly been amplified, and I think now we're understanding how
Speaker 1: they got amplify. They got amplified by the SBLC or
Speaker 1: people like the SPLC. And this is why the investigations
Speaker 1: need to continue, because now we learned the mechanism.
Speaker 3: The mechanism is the SBLC is the ones.
Speaker 1: That burned down their own house and then they're the
Speaker 1: ones who run the insurance company and say, hey, I
Speaker 1: need my million dollars because my house got burned down.
Speaker 3: That's what they do.
Speaker 1: We learn that, So now we always suspected it, now
Speaker 1: we know it from the government. We also know that
Speaker 1: Joe Biden canceled this investigation even though that Joe Biden
Speaker 1: said his entire predicate for running for president Charlottesville Unite
Speaker 1: the Right rally, and Kamala here has kept echoing it.
Speaker 1: You were observed enough to catch this clip for us.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna play this. This is from a debate between
Speaker 1: Kamala and Trump.
Speaker 4: Let's remember Charlottesville, where there was a mob of people
Speaker 4: carrying tiki torches spewing anti Semitic hate. And what did
Speaker 4: the president then at the time say, there were fine
Speaker 4: people on each side.
Speaker 3: Oh, I'm sorry, but she went to Harlem to hang
Speaker 3: out with Al Sharpton. If you want to talk about
Speaker 3: spewing anti Semitic hate. I'm old enough to not have
Speaker 3: been there, but still remember the Crown Heights riots. She
Speaker 3: is just I mean, aside from the fact that they
Speaker 3: obviously knew what the SBOC was ju which was why
Speaker 3: the investigation was shut down in the administration, stop it.
Speaker 3: She is so toxic. She's so toxic. Somebody who is
Speaker 3: sitting and eating with Al Sharpton has no right to
Speaker 3: say a word, let alone somebody who's presiding over burying
Speaker 3: the investigation what she knows is going on with Charlottesville exactly.
Speaker 3: And it's interesting how the.
Speaker 1: Bullet we dodged that these people who lied, of course
Speaker 1: to find people hosts, which we documented bright part dozens
Speaker 1: and dozens of times. It's in both of my first
Speaker 1: two books going through how inaccurate that was. Donald Trump
Speaker 1: never said they were find people on both sides. I
Speaker 1: cannot take more time from the audience to explain this,
Speaker 1: but he did not say that. He said he condemned
Speaker 1: the neo Nazis totally. And yet the SPOC has been
Speaker 1: relied upon by the tech establishment, by the media establishment
Speaker 1: as a justification for censoring or other ring or censoring
Speaker 1: or limiting the reach and the signal of normative conservative
Speaker 1: actors in the space.
Speaker 3: And we're not.
Speaker 1: Calling any of those people out yet. We haven't even
Speaker 1: got our mind around it yet. That's why I'm hoping
Speaker 1: we're in the early stages of this new cycle. Well, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 3: That is really the bow on this whole thing, is
Speaker 3: that the SPLC Center, which is the SPLC which is
Speaker 3: literally just a fraud. It's you know, the way that
Speaker 3: the Doha framed it is perfectly correct, I think, is
Speaker 3: that they were taking people's money then pay the groups
Speaker 3: that they explicitly said they were taking the money to fight,
Speaker 3: and in doing that they created this huge industry. They're
Speaker 3: they're involved with not only tech companies and being recruited
Speaker 3: by tech companies to dictate the censorship that included obviously
Speaker 3: victimizing Breitbart probably at the top of the list, but
Speaker 3: you know, think about all the corporations, all the think tanks,
Speaker 3: all of the paper that they generated, the official paper
Speaker 3: that led our policy, both social policy and actual policy
Speaker 3: on what counts as acceptable speech. It's like, this is
Speaker 3: a travesty and it goes very deep. This isn't just
Speaker 3: like Scavving done us for a couple of million dollars
Speaker 3: or whatever the way. I don't want to downplay that,
Speaker 3: but there's there's this reaches very far, and it reaches
Speaker 3: very far, by the way into corporate America.
Speaker 1: It does reach into corporate America, and I think that
Speaker 1: one thing to point out is how corporate America supported
Speaker 1: the SPLC. But I noted this on the live show already, Emma.
Speaker 1: But the poverty part the CEO is making for half
Speaker 1: a million dollars, and I guarantee she's wetting her beak
Speaker 1: in other ways too. But it's like, come on, no
Speaker 1: poverty going on here. It's the so okay so insurrection Barbie,
Speaker 1: which is one of the counts on X Everything app
Speaker 1: which you flagged this one for US. Georgie and Lamal
Speaker 1: Clooney publish public donations to SPLC a million dollars. Tim Apple,
Speaker 1: from a formerly known as Tim Cook a million dollars.
Speaker 1: JP Morgan Chase half a million dollars and also a
Speaker 1: million at least another yeah, another million of the ADL
Speaker 1: for them too. We could go into them MGM resorts
Speaker 1: and million dollars.
Speaker 3: They went from.
Speaker 1: Sixty five million donations to one hundred and thirty after Charlottesville.
Speaker 1: I think the number is actually understated. I think you
Speaker 1: went like fifty to two hundred and thirty because I
Speaker 1: played this exact graphic.
Speaker 3: That's the whole thing is.
Speaker 1: So they probably it appears funded the Unite the Right rally,
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris and Joe Biden run on it, and then
Speaker 1: they two and a half x their donations and get
Speaker 1: them from the biggest corporation of the planet because they
Speaker 1: purport to be defending the country for a hoax they created.
Speaker 3: Yes, exactly. Let and never mind the the non monetary
Speaker 3: kind of partnerships like you know, being recruited by social
Speaker 3: media companies to define what counts is acceptable to say,
Speaker 3: or what counts as acceptable to boost, or what counts
Speaker 3: is you know, acceptable to see. Let alone the you know,
Speaker 3: the partnerships with all these different organizations that help create
Speaker 3: the paperwork for hr companies across this country for HR
Speaker 3: departments across the country, a different companies like the Advocacy.
Speaker 3: The policy Advocacy is actually to me scarier than the
Speaker 3: amount of money that they were collecting off of this scam.
Speaker 3: They were creating the balands of what's acceptable in behavior
Speaker 3: and speech. That's right. It was a massive Overton window mover.
Speaker 1: And what I'm sad to say about this emma is
Speaker 1: that you can make the case in a lot of
Speaker 1: ways that they that they won that because Biden was
Speaker 1: able to win in twenty twenty and they were able
Speaker 1: to create I think, really move our expectations, particularly the
Speaker 1: Democrat side, for a truth in I've long.
Speaker 3: Said truth is not a left wing value.
Speaker 1: I got this from my directly, from my mentor Dennis
Speaker 1: Praeger in this regard, and I think it's been true
Speaker 1: every step of the way. But the amount of lying
Speaker 1: and deceit they're willing to tolerate in order to further
Speaker 1: their political gains just when to overdrive during Trump and
Speaker 1: it just this is all the evidence you need to
Speaker 1: know that you can't take left wing sources seriously. And
Speaker 1: I feel like the fact that every major corporation and
Speaker 1: another insurrection barbietweet that you flagged tying just every major
Speaker 1: corporation you can think of to the SPLC in some
Speaker 1: ways where they didn't cut them off when there were
Speaker 1: so many. It was so complicated at Breitbart when they
Speaker 1: were canceling us for no reason in twenty sixteen, what
Speaker 1: sort of.
Speaker 3: Years ago. Yeah, and we talk about the advertising book.
Speaker 1: We talked about all the d banking, which goes on
Speaker 1: to this day of conservatives, Conservatives constantly in fear of
Speaker 1: having parts of their digital life just removed from them
Speaker 1: whole cloth because of their viewpoints. And then the SPLC
Speaker 1: just working with all these major corporations while they were
Speaker 1: trying to frame an entire movement to commit an insurrection
Speaker 1: and to rigging election essentially.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and that's, by the way, the debankler, I mean,
Speaker 3: I'm glad that's another one. The SBLC was going and
Speaker 3: having contracts with the federal government. The de banking story
Speaker 3: is about the federal government, by the way, and the
Speaker 3: overreach and hostage taking that they do of banks. When
Speaker 3: they say that this person is a threat, who tells
Speaker 3: them what a threat is? This is? I feel, well,
Speaker 3: that's it. It's this is like so this goes so deep.
Speaker 3: This is like such a crazy this is actually a
Speaker 3: crazy bombshell story. It's a whale. And I hope that Cash,
Speaker 3: I hope that Cash just follows it to the end,
Speaker 3: because there's so much to pull at here that you could,
Speaker 3: like really just really take a lot of flesh.
Speaker 1: We got the initial splash of confirming what we all
Speaker 1: believed to be true, but now we need more detail.
Speaker 1: We need to hammer this home, and we need to
Speaker 1: figure out who is behind them, who knew what and
Speaker 1: when at the extent to which the infiltration took place.
Speaker 1: And also there's gonna be other groups like the SPOC
Speaker 1: you did the same stuff.
Speaker 3: And I think all of that about to me ratifying
Speaker 3: the result of this. Ye Paul is pro with with guardrails,
Speaker 3: especially with regards to the government and government contractors for
Speaker 3: that matter, which include most of corporate America.
Speaker 1: Absolutely right, And you know, you always got to be
Speaker 1: aware of fake news. We thought we went through this
Speaker 1: era of fake news era and then people just rejected it.
Speaker 1: You know, this wasn't on our rundown today, But I'm
Speaker 1: just going to spring it on you that you saw
Speaker 1: this hop blode Maga influencer with a great rack turns
Speaker 1: out to be completely fake, totally AI run by a
Speaker 1: guy in India. Yeah, run by a guy in India.
Speaker 1: The let's see, so.
Speaker 3: This is among us in maga world online. Isn't an
Speaker 3: Indian guy? Yeah, with an AI account?
Speaker 1: So some guy named Sam who is a he's working
Speaker 1: on he's an orthopedic surgeon in training in India, told
Speaker 1: Wired he created an AI generated image of a young
Speaker 1: woman named Emily Hart and.
Speaker 3: She looks fantastic. It's just a fantastic AI.
Speaker 1: Image and she says really based as expression goes things
Speaker 1: on social media, and Maga World fell for it, and
Speaker 1: I just I don't see a lot of the hallmarks
Speaker 1: of AI. It looked pretty. It's pretty sophisticated. But I'm
Speaker 1: just warning you guys. You got a buyerbleware on the
Speaker 1: SAI stuff. But she was pro Christian, pro Second Amendment,
Speaker 1: pro life, anti abortion, anti woke, anti immigration, and she
Speaker 1: is racked up ten thousand followers a month.
Speaker 3: Is dupe in all of us. The perfect influencer doesn't exist.
Speaker 3: That's great. I mean, you know, I tend to think
Speaker 3: that these things will just end up becoming like this
Speaker 3: is gonna just fry well First of all, it's going
Speaker 3: to fry the brains of boomers in ways that we
Speaker 3: never thought possible. And I know every time I say
Speaker 3: something about the boomers, I get in trouble and I'm sorry,
Speaker 3: I'm sorry. I don't need to be offensive. But it's
Speaker 3: just a difference and generational thing where there's an extremely
Speaker 3: again lucrative sect in making up like extremely cliche conservative
Speaker 3: talking points and accounts and then duping people who don't
Speaker 3: have the uh the eye. Can I say that that
Speaker 3: don't have the eye to spot things that are like
Speaker 3: clearly like a scam and stealing their data, money, engagement,
Speaker 3: whatever it is. This is the next iteration probably of
Speaker 3: that that you've seen, you know, taking over Facebook. And
Speaker 3: it's sad, but.
Speaker 1: It's sad, but you know, I'm hopeful about it because
Speaker 1: this is the sort of thing that what if you
Speaker 1: were someone who got sucked in, What if you're like
Speaker 1: a big Emily Hart fan, you realize it was a
Speaker 1: twenty two year old Indian guy, and like, maybe you'll
Speaker 1: be so repulse with yourself you'll go outside and go,
Speaker 1: you know, go for a jog or go rucking or something.
Speaker 1: It's a or go take a pickleball or go get
Speaker 1: some sunshine everywhere?
Speaker 3: So like maybe this would be last draw.
Speaker 1: Like I looked at myself in the mirror and I
Speaker 1: realized I'm the problem.
Speaker 3: Yeah this is you thought call centers were bad, Just
Speaker 3: wait till they get American flag bikinis.
Speaker 1: Yeah wow these apparently this fake creation had a only
Speaker 1: fans also, So I mean, and then you could just
Speaker 1: ton it. I mean, everyone's getting to be ten ten
Speaker 1: millionaire over there, right, That's what I learned.
Speaker 3: Why bothering being a doctor? That sounds like a lot
Speaker 3: of school for real less money. Yeah, why is he
Speaker 3: even training? Still?
Speaker 1: He's got it down. Just just do it again. I'm
Speaker 1: sure it'll work again. So all right, I want to
Speaker 1: do a hard pivot here. I want to talk about
Speaker 1: immigration with you the I want to get a sense
Speaker 1: of where we're at on the immigration agenda here because
Speaker 1: the Rationalson had a report out a poll that seventy
Speaker 1: percent of Republicans say deport all illegal immigrants. So what
Speaker 1: that means to me, Emma is thirty percent are not
Speaker 1: sure that we should deport all illegal immigrants. Means that
Speaker 1: some illegal immigrants.
Speaker 3: Should be here.
Speaker 1: I just don't know what that's about and it feels
Speaker 1: like the same way I've been saying, woke is not dead,
Speaker 1: Woke might even be making a comeback. It seems like
Speaker 1: we're getting some currency with the dignid Dot Act, which
Speaker 1: we've gone on and discussed on the show. There seems
Speaker 1: to be a renewed belief that we can get some
Speaker 1: sort of an amnesty done. The New York Times is
Speaker 1: just had a big article which I think we both
Speaker 1: came to independently, that suggesting that the basically glorifying being
Speaker 1: an illegal alien and celebrating these people from Honduras who
Speaker 1: came here illegally to have a baby that would be
Speaker 1: an American and thus make them Americans. And the New
Speaker 1: York Timess wrote this very positive way. I want everyone
Speaker 1: to get a sense of this article. So let me
Speaker 1: all throughout the name. She made sure her baby was
Speaker 1: more an American than federal agents separated them. So it's
Speaker 1: the federal agency the bad guys, not the illegal alien
Speaker 1: who broke into our country to have an anchor baby.
Speaker 1: It feels like we're backtracking here media wise, Emma, what's
Speaker 1: going on?
Speaker 3: Yeah, Well, I mean I think that the Rassmussen poll
Speaker 3: and the New York Times article are probably pretty you know,
Speaker 3: the rass muse in pol tells you how many people
Speaker 3: the New York Times article affected who are relevant to
Speaker 3: this conversation, i e. Trump space, which is probably like
Speaker 3: thirty percent. I think for thirty percent that is missing
Speaker 3: from that group is like the people who have sympathy
Speaker 3: for stories like this, where it's like, twenty eight year
Speaker 3: old girl comes here, don't pay attention to the fact
Speaker 3: that she was just deported for being in a car
Speaker 3: with a bunch of cocaine in the glove box, comes
Speaker 3: here to have a baby, just wants opportunity for the
Speaker 3: baby and doesn't really count as a criminal because we
Speaker 3: feel bad for her, and then gets arrested for being
Speaker 3: a criminal, even though we don't think she should be one,
Speaker 3: but she is one, and we all should feel bad
Speaker 3: about it. You know. That's obviously they're going for that
Speaker 3: thirty percent demo of Republicans and maybe trying to peel
Speaker 3: off a few more percent of people who will feel
Speaker 3: bad for this woman because she was taken care of,
Speaker 3: taken away from her baby, which is certainly obviously the
Speaker 3: probably most difficult thing that a human being can go through.
Speaker 3: One of them at least being separated from a newborn
Speaker 3: as a mother. But that said, obviously in their guest
Speaker 3: for effort to glaze this person, they don't like pay
Speaker 3: much attention to how awful she is and irresponsible she is,
Speaker 3: because yes, that's right, it's unbearable to imagine being separated
Speaker 3: from your newborn. How could how could you like break
Speaker 3: the law and involve your baby in your crime? Like
Speaker 3: what did you think was going to happen? So you know,
Speaker 3: the article brought me to the exact opposite place, which
Speaker 3: was first of all, not sympathizing with this woman, that's
Speaker 3: for sure, because I don't sympathize with people who abuse babies,
Speaker 3: but second of all, really shining a light on how
Speaker 3: our policies just attract the scum of the earth. This
Speaker 3: woman is the scum of the earth. Doing that to
Speaker 3: a baby that's not one week old is so horrifying,
Speaker 3: Like that baby is the one who has to go
Speaker 3: and lay in a cold bascinet in a hospital alone,
Speaker 3: waiting for somebody to pick them up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it is quite quite the contrast to where I
Speaker 1: felt like we were going as a country, especially when
Speaker 1: you think about an affordability issue that we have. I'm
Speaker 1: trying to get with him with so many Americans here,
Speaker 1: the disconnect here that I'm trying to understand We're heading
Speaker 1: into a whole new era because of AI comes up
Speaker 1: so often now on the show that Americans are deeply
Speaker 1: insecure that we're heading towards an AI jobs apocalypse.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yes, go on, Yeah, And so.
Speaker 1: Why are we renewing our desire to import a under
Speaker 1: class of foreigners to come into this country to further
Speaker 1: drive down wages of Americans when everyone is concerned that
Speaker 1: AI is going to cost more jobs and adds And
Speaker 1: that's where my money is. My money's on that. I'm
Speaker 1: not saying that AI might not be a net plus
Speaker 1: in the long run. I think it probably won't, but
Speaker 1: I remain optimistic. But overall, we know that it just
Speaker 1: doesn't stand a reason that we're going to have a
Speaker 1: glut of jobs with a disrupt the job market obviously.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and so that was Yeah, that was definitely something
Speaker 3: that really stuck out to me as like a background
Speaker 3: kind of thought too, is like, Wow, we're coming into
Speaker 3: a huge disruption in the job market in the next
Speaker 3: ten years, and like this is not helping bringing in
Speaker 3: hordes of people and giving them all kinds of loopholes
Speaker 3: to become, you know, able to work in this country.
Speaker 3: Isn't helping. The second thing that really said to me
Speaker 3: in the article, and I highly recommend everybody in the
Speaker 3: audience go read it. Please go read it, because it
Speaker 3: is so perfect. It's so perfect, and it really helps
Speaker 3: I think describe. I love first person reporting. I love
Speaker 3: reporting that has, like, you know, one character, a subject
Speaker 3: that you're following, and that subject really paints a picture
Speaker 3: of a broader story. And this is so good at that.
Speaker 3: And that one thing that this displays, too is how
Speaker 3: little they regard the value of US citizenship in terms
Speaker 3: of its symbolic value. You see that where the parents
Speaker 3: or the parents end up getting Basically, these people come
Speaker 3: in for the express purpose of having an anchor baby.
Speaker 3: They've already been deported, and the reason they've been deported
Speaker 3: is because they've been here illegally, and also they got
Speaker 3: caught with cocaine, so they get deported to Honduras, which
Speaker 3: by the way, they're not even actually from. They were
Speaker 3: in Honduras chilling there and then came to the US
Speaker 3: from there and as the third place that they ended up.
Speaker 3: But so anyway, they're in the safe country of Honduras
Speaker 3: for them, and they are like, okay, she's like about
Speaker 3: to pop, let's go back to the US. And they
Speaker 3: get it obviously, you know, they violated a deportation order
Speaker 3: because they're here now again. And so she gets taken
Speaker 3: away from the baby. But the whole time, like the
Speaker 3: whole thing with her boyfriend keeps saying it's just important
Speaker 3: to get that piece of paper. And so she gets
Speaker 3: separated from the kid. The grandmother comes and picks her up.
Speaker 3: It's like the baby is like having some sort of
Speaker 3: health is she she has her milk coming in. She's
Speaker 3: having a crisis. Everyone's having a crisis because they've got
Speaker 3: separated obviously. And then at the end they get the
Speaker 3: porter back to Honduras and the kid pops up in
Speaker 3: Honduras with them, and the last like line of it
Speaker 3: is the boyfriend being like, well, you know, all word
Speaker 3: that could we got that piece of paper. It's like, okay,
Speaker 3: you are despicable. And also that's all this is a
Speaker 3: piece of paper. Nothing else matters. Nothing about the country matters,
Speaker 3: Living in the country doesn't matter, Caring about the country
Speaker 3: doesn't matter. Yeah, yeah, Anya, it doesn't matter. This is
Speaker 3: just a source of extraction for you to get that
Speaker 3: piece of paper. You mentioned something there in passing.
Speaker 1: But it was such a big deal is that the
Speaker 1: they got also got deported for drug possession. And it's
Speaker 1: one of these things where they the New York Times
Speaker 1: goes out of their way to make it this seem
Speaker 1: that it might not have been their drugs, might've been
Speaker 1: like their odds drugs, and it.
Speaker 3: Wasn't a lot of drugs in the car.
Speaker 1: It's like exactly, And it's just one of these things
Speaker 1: where I don't know, I've been for cars drugs.
Speaker 3: Yeah it was a car, Yeah, exactly, it was the
Speaker 3: car's drugs. It was exactly.
Speaker 1: It's it's one of these things where I've been on
Speaker 1: the road for twenty four years now and I've never
Speaker 1: been pulled over and had the car search and they
Speaker 1: found drugs in my car.
Speaker 3: So it's like I've been able to avoid it.
Speaker 1: And so I just I don't have a ton of
Speaker 1: sympathy if you're here illegally and you weren't able to
Speaker 1: make sure that Hey, by the way, Auntie, if I'm
Speaker 1: gonna or tia, is that a tia? If I'm gonna
Speaker 1: drive your car. Please don't leave your your snow in
Speaker 1: the glove box while I'm driving, because I don't want
Speaker 1: to get deported if I get pulled over.
Speaker 3: So wise Man once said, they're not sending their best
Speaker 3: sending that No. Listen, I'm not going to cast an
Speaker 3: aspersion on every single whatever. These particular people to me
Speaker 3: are scum. I use that word, and I don't take
Speaker 3: it back. You know you're You're just so. There's nobody,
Speaker 3: nobody in the story matters to them.
Speaker 1: Unbelievably, they don't care about Americans, and I I just
Speaker 1: am hoping that Americans will see this. But here's the point,
Speaker 1: and you've been commenting on this a little bit on
Speaker 1: past shows, is that it's not just that we're have
Speaker 1: too many immigrants relative to native born, which is which
Speaker 1: is clearly true.
Speaker 3: It's a the It's just a fact. And not say
Speaker 3: I'm anti immigrant.
Speaker 1: I'm saying that the balance is off if we want
Speaker 1: to have a common culture at all, if we believe
Speaker 1: American values. It's a why we should only be importing
Speaker 1: people if they are going to adapt American values. American
Speaker 1: values are very easy to say, e plurpersentam in God,
Speaker 1: we trust liberty, the First Amendment, second Amendment. If you
Speaker 1: can do that stuff and you know it, and you're
Speaker 1: ready to do it, and you're ready to contribute and
Speaker 1: not drain on the system. To add to the system,
Speaker 1: there should be a certain level of immigrants. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying there should be no immigrants, but overall, there was
Speaker 1: no standard like that as far as I can tell.
Speaker 1: And we are doing our best to intentionally import the
Speaker 1: third world, not first world. We're not getting a bunch
Speaker 1: of people who you know, have been had their nose
Speaker 1: down in books, in the hollowed institutions in Europe and
Speaker 1: in Asia, and we're bringing them in and they're gonna
Speaker 1: stay and they're gonna contribute. No, we're importing third worlders.
Speaker 1: That's the desire. What is this impulse that we're doing this? Yeah, No,
Speaker 1: one hundred percent.
Speaker 3: And this reminds me of this series of articles that
Speaker 3: came out, like opinion articles that came out like a
Speaker 3: couple of weeks ago, and they were going kind of
Speaker 3: viral online. One of them was from the Washington Post
Speaker 3: that started it by Shahdi Hamid, who is apparently like
Speaker 3: a pretty well known columnist there. I don't know him,
Speaker 3: but he wrote this hall and that caught fire called
Speaker 3: Muslims shouldn't have to assimilate to belong where He basically,
Speaker 3: like strangely kind of says something to the effect of,
Speaker 3: you know, Muslims fit in fine, like they're totally homophobic,
Speaker 3: just like the right. It was a very strange take,
Speaker 3: but anyway, you know, he was trying to say that they,
Speaker 3: you know, there shouldn't be some sort of bending yourself
Speaker 3: out of shape to come to the United States and
Speaker 3: prove that you belong here. You should be able to
Speaker 3: be who you are in a plural in a society
Speaker 3: that embraces pluralism. And then there was another guy from unheard.
Speaker 3: I can try to see if I can find it.
Speaker 3: There was another guy from unheard who wrote, like a
Speaker 3: pretty interesting response. Who doesn't seem to be who doesn't
Speaker 3: seem to be from the right, That doesn't that isn't
Speaker 3: the impression he gives. And I think he's Muslim as well.
Speaker 3: And he wrote a response that was so true, saying
Speaker 3: kind of like I'll split, I'll meet you halfway in
Speaker 3: that perhaps there is and some sort of like strict
Speaker 3: cultural rule that one must have to abide by, especially
Speaker 3: if they have a religion that isn't the majority religion. However,
Speaker 3: there is a responsibility to be on your best behavior
Speaker 3: as a representative of a minority. And I thought that
Speaker 3: that was a really interesting concept, and that is a
Speaker 3: concept that's present in Judaism too, very strongly. I actually
Speaker 3: even touched on it once talking about Josh Shapiro humiliating
Speaker 3: himself in the name of Judaism. Yeah, to a democratic
Speaker 3: primary where it's there's something so unclassy about in the
Speaker 3: name of your group acting in a way that is
Speaker 3: untoward or just rude or imposing in any way, And
Speaker 3: that is I think like probably the correct take if
Speaker 3: we have to live in a multicultural society, which I
Speaker 3: think that at this point is the realistic position we're in.
Speaker 3: It's like, you know, we're not Quebec, which I hope
Speaker 3: that we talk about the California stuff next, but you know,
Speaker 3: where I come from, there are certain things that are
Speaker 3: not negotiable. We don't have freedom of speech. So for instance,
Speaker 3: you have to learn the official language, and it's extremely
Speaker 3: tongue in cheek goage to not know French, but we
Speaker 3: don't have that here. So you know, in that case,
Speaker 3: then we have to find some way of mutual respect.
Speaker 3: And it can't be that I come here, get to
Speaker 3: drive around with cocaine, flout every single law I can
Speaker 3: find in my path, and then get a sob story
Speaker 3: in the New York Times that you're also to sympathize
Speaker 3: with me about that. It ain't it.
Speaker 1: This is what's interesting to me is that the one
Speaker 1: of Americas, I think some of our edge is that
Speaker 1: we have had this strong set of values that are unique.
Speaker 1: You can't think of another country that has both freedom
Speaker 1: of speech and the Second Amendment is their key values
Speaker 1: of many one that we do acknowledge our multiculturalism right
Speaker 1: off the bat, but we're supposed to all work towards
Speaker 1: the same goals.
Speaker 3: The one it's at the end of the phrase one, Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: You think that people are running the leering centers and
Speaker 1: the fake hospices in California, Like do we think there
Speaker 1: are many? One know they're trying to builk the rest
Speaker 1: of us, and so that should be a mortal sin
Speaker 1: to all of us. We should regard that as horrific,
Speaker 1: and yet yet we don't, and then we're seeing increased Yeah.
Speaker 3: Sorry, go ahead, that's such a deep point, you know. Sorry,
Speaker 3: But the leering centers and the anchor baby thing, it's
Speaker 3: all the same thing. It's it's not out of many one,
Speaker 3: it's many come to undermine the one. That is what
Speaker 3: they all are. It's undermining the collective cohesion of our
Speaker 3: society and the culture of our society.
Speaker 1: We don't do that, yere exactly, That's what And this
Speaker 1: actually goes for cultural currency on the left, like that's
Speaker 1: the whole thing. The SPLC undermines the cultural cohesion. That's
Speaker 1: what they do professionally, that's what they do. This for sure,
Speaker 1: we all could observe it, but now we know for fact,
Speaker 1: with data and with the investigation has taking place. This
Speaker 1: is a Congressman, Tom Swosey, who I think is a
Speaker 1: New York congressman, and I want to play this clip
Speaker 1: of him. This is a mainstream it seems like a
Speaker 1: sis hetero and he's a white Democrat. Check out this
Speaker 1: language here.
Speaker 5: He's surrounded by some of his advisors that seemed to
Speaker 5: be just everything's about, you know, a Christian nation. You know,
Speaker 5: I'm a Catholic. I'm proud to be a Catholic. But
Speaker 5: you know, this is not this is not a Christian nation.
Speaker 5: Certainly there have been a lot of Christians involved in
Speaker 5: the in the nation's history, but we're found that a
Speaker 5: lot of people came to America, they escaped from England
Speaker 5: and other places because of religious persecution, and that's why
Speaker 5: the country was always set up without a national religion
Speaker 5: or a national religious requirement. That's not to say there
Speaker 5: was an influence by Christians, but there was an influence
Speaker 5: by by by Jews. There was an influence even by
Speaker 5: Thomas Jefferson talked about the Quran.
Speaker 1: What what's he getting at here? That's the main point.
Speaker 1: That's the main point I'm trying to get at. It
Speaker 1: is not that the there isn't a out it's a
Speaker 1: kernel of truth to because of course there is. We
Speaker 1: don't have a declared religion. We're not going to have
Speaker 1: a state sponsored religion. I would love it if Christians, Jews,
Speaker 1: and Muslims all can work harmoniously towards that goal of
Speaker 1: many one in this country. That's part of our founding principles.
Speaker 1: But just going out of your way. What I resent
Speaker 1: about this is going out of our way to act
Speaker 1: as though the founders their framers and not wouldn't have
Speaker 1: liked to have seen us have a Bible based, God
Speaker 1: based society. It feels like this has been going on
Speaker 1: for the last several decades. Are we getting happier? Are
Speaker 1: we getting more productive? Are we getting more cohesive? Is
Speaker 1: the national debt getting paid down? Are we winning all
Speaker 1: the wars that we're entering? How are things going for us?
Speaker 1: Are we hooked on pills? Are we hooked on our phones?
Speaker 1: Are we have mental disease?
Speaker 3: More or less?
Speaker 1: It seems like the more we've touted this stuff, the
Speaker 1: worst things have got for America.
Speaker 3: And yet they're still in on it. Oh yeah, one
Speaker 3: hundred percent, And it's such a fake. The left always
Speaker 3: loves to use the slogan of separation of church and state.
Speaker 3: Is like as if they have new respect for, you know,
Speaker 3: the founding principles. But they love that one to performatively
Speaker 3: say to conservatives who want to see more God in
Speaker 3: public life, and that is not at all. They reverse
Speaker 3: the meaning of that phrase. The reason that we decided
Speaker 3: on the separation of church and state was so that
Speaker 3: the state would not impinge on the churches operations, not
Speaker 3: the other way around. It was to allow flourishing of
Speaker 3: the church in public life and it not be restricted
Speaker 3: by the government. It wasn't to make sure that the
Speaker 3: government stays as secular as possible. And you can't have
Speaker 3: any crosses anywhere. And by the way, there are certain
Speaker 3: states now that are installing prayer rooms in public schools.
Speaker 3: So I don't know if you remember that. We were told,
Speaker 3: you know, scolded for wanting to have crosses in schools
Speaker 3: in Christian areas, which, by the way, New York's third
Speaker 3: congressional trict is one where Suzi is the congressman. But
Speaker 3: we were scolded for wanting to have crosses in schools.
Speaker 3: We were scolded for wanting to have the Ten Commandments
Speaker 3: in schools. No, like, that's too like scary, it's too
Speaker 3: like religious. We don't have a religion. Oh but as
Speaker 3: it turns out, actually, if Islam is the majority religion
Speaker 3: in your neighborhood, then you can do the prayer room.
Speaker 3: So ha ha like it's just you know. The thing
Speaker 3: about this that I find so disingenuous and obnoxious is
Speaker 3: that this is only applied to when Christians are the majority.
Speaker 3: When any other religion is the majority, they're allowed to
Speaker 3: use public institutions for the religious ends. It's it's just Christians.
Speaker 3: We have to sit down and be a little more
Speaker 3: quiet with the cross stuff. Yeah, that's right, that's exactly right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, everyone else can can play up their religion aside
Speaker 1: from the Christians.
Speaker 3: That's right. Good, all right, So let's let's let's.
Speaker 1: Pivot to we're talking about California, which is I think
Speaker 1: ties together a lot of this stuff because California's example
Speaker 1: of a state that has imported the third world.
Speaker 3: We continue to do so. We want open borders.
Speaker 1: We like the idea of servicing people who take from
Speaker 1: the system and just got here more than people who
Speaker 1: have laid down routs and have paid in the tax base.
Speaker 1: That's been our goal from the start. And let's see
Speaker 1: if the citizens are able to make any sort of
Speaker 1: a pendulum swing back in the direction of sanity.
Speaker 3: Probably not.
Speaker 1: There's a debate that took place on maybe a couple
Speaker 1: days ago as people hear this, but I got some
Speaker 1: fresh clips I want to share with you. First of all,
Speaker 1: this is Tom Steyer talking about should illegal aliens or
Speaker 1: not even alle aliens, but should be able who don't
Speaker 1: speak English get commercial driver's licenses in California.
Speaker 3: Check out this one, am I, mister Stier, where do
Speaker 3: you draw the line on this?
Speaker 2: Should language proficiency for truckers be strictly enforced, even if
Speaker 2: it means that some of them.
Speaker 3: Will probably lose their jobs? You have sixty seven.
Speaker 6: I agree with what was said, which is we don't
Speaker 6: know the context of this stop, but what I can
Speaker 6: say is this racial profiling is illegal, and in fact,
Speaker 6: picking on people based on the color of their skin
Speaker 6: in the state of California is illegal.
Speaker 1: So he's asked, should we have truck drivers who are
Speaker 1: mandated to be able to read the signs on the
Speaker 1: road they are traversing on to get a commercial license?
Speaker 1: And his reaction is, it is illegal to racially profile.
Speaker 1: And these are the guys who very welcomed the governor.
Speaker 3: I think that's really racist. Like, I mean, I come
Speaker 3: from a place where you don't. You have people who
Speaker 3: don't speak a word of English and many of most
Speaker 3: of them, all of them frankly, are white. So oh,
Speaker 3: that's a great point. So because you're from a French product,
Speaker 3: be a racial minority to non speak English, it's like
Speaker 3: that sounds racist and dangerous. But sorry, go on.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's no, it's interesting because it's a great
Speaker 1: point because all of you French Canadians who might have
Speaker 1: immigrated to the United States legally or illegally, there's no
Speaker 1: guarantee that you.
Speaker 3: Know exactly are going to be targeted by the Trucker
Speaker 3: Law and are having no representation in Tom's uh in
Speaker 3: his in his passion defense.
Speaker 1: Here's the big question for me that I'm always tracking.
Speaker 1: This is my how are we doing? How are we doing?
Speaker 1: Question that I asked virtually every show is that one
Speaker 1: of our major political parties has talked nonsp about race
Speaker 1: and only race, and they've done so for my entire
Speaker 1: sentient life. And I just want to ask, are the
Speaker 1: their states improving? Are people going to those states? Are
Speaker 1: they fleeing as their tax rate going up or down?
Speaker 1: Does quality of life getting better in their areas? When
Speaker 1: all they do is talk about our racial rievances. And
Speaker 1: because they keep doing, you know, I played a clip
Speaker 1: earlier in the week of Kamala Harris at a black
Speaker 1: women's forum where she's telling black women, I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: mine also like you're the worst caricature you've ever heard
Speaker 1: of a Democrat black sassy woman. And it's so pandering.
Speaker 1: It's so belittling, it's so racist. It's racist, and I
Speaker 1: feel like they're not getting any benefit. But they won't
Speaker 1: come off of it politically. They won't say, you know what,
Speaker 1: maybe we should try something different politically, And it's really
Speaker 1: being tested right now in California.
Speaker 3: Yeah, for so true. And by the way, Kamal Harris
Speaker 3: another French Canadian talking down to minorities. Anyone doesn't get it,
Speaker 3: go to Breitbart dot com and do like Colon Kamala
Speaker 3: from Canada was the headline.
Speaker 1: Oh man, that's one of my favorite Ama Joe investigations
Speaker 1: at Bright Break.
Speaker 3: But anyway, so yeah, no, but I think that you
Speaker 3: kind of said it in the subtext of what you
Speaker 3: just said, which is thing ever gets better and we
Speaker 3: have to fixate on the most on the most inflammatory
Speaker 3: and charged and offensive and distracting topic in order to
Speaker 3: look away from how's life in California? Half of La
Speaker 3: just burned to the ground. You know, how's life on
Speaker 3: skid row? How's it going in the hospital waiting rooms?
Speaker 3: I would love to hear from your wife about that.
Speaker 3: You know, how's it going in your public schools? All
Speaker 3: of these institutions and all of these infrastructures that we
Speaker 3: pay exorbitant fees for. I'm sure your taxes aren't where
Speaker 3: you'd like them to be now are being before us.
Speaker 3: You have these zombie creatures called junkies roaming around your neighborhoods,
Speaker 3: and and they're talking about the how it's racial targeting
Speaker 3: to insist on English. It's all just falling back on
Speaker 3: this talking point to not have to talk about everything
Speaker 3: that was just listed by both of us. And you know,
Speaker 3: I mean, unfortunately for Californians, it's like you get what
Speaker 3: you vote for. Is I don't say that in a
Speaker 3: way that's sassy. I live in New York City. God knows,
Speaker 3: I can't say much, but no, I know. And that's
Speaker 3: why I've embraced to be a thing is going to
Speaker 3: ruin you.
Speaker 1: And that's why I've embraced the Maame Dodd experiment because
Speaker 1: I feel like people have completely content to watch us
Speaker 1: like we're a chimpanzee's in a cave in a cage
Speaker 1: going through the similar experiment out in California, where the
Speaker 1: political class has chosen people who are not producers at
Speaker 1: the expense of the producers, and it's they're testing us.
Speaker 3: We who produce in the state, how much we're willing
Speaker 3: to endure before we all leave. And that's what's being
Speaker 3: tested here. All right, I got some more saying, just sorry,
Speaker 3: just one more thing on this because the SPLC's we're
Speaker 3: talking about the SPLC and now we're talking about Tom
Speaker 3: Steyer in California, and you just you just have to
Speaker 3: point out, like I mean, homelessness is like a great
Speaker 3: example the homelessness. The industrial complex around philanthropy and California
Speaker 3: and homelessness is insane. I don't know if you've ever
Speaker 3: looked into it. Maybe it's worth doing, like literally a
Speaker 3: whole episode on the corruption of nonprofits in California, but
Speaker 3: they are basically being paid to perpetuate the homelessess crisis.
Speaker 3: You think that a big Democrat is going to go
Speaker 3: and point out real problems like that, No way, there's
Speaker 3: too much money at stake. It's like you're gonna get
Speaker 3: Eric Swollweld if you go anywhere near there.
Speaker 1: This came up, homelessness came up. I got to Katie
Speaker 1: Porter clips. Both are good. They're talking about homelessness. I
Speaker 1: don't know which one I'm gonna pick first, but we'll
Speaker 1: we'll play and don't react to it.
Speaker 2: Porter same question, do you believe that English proficiency language
Speaker 2: proficiency should be strictly enforced for truck drivers?
Speaker 3: You have sixty seconds.
Speaker 7: I would absolutely fight the Trump administration because the job
Speaker 7: of the California governor is to protect Californians, and right
Speaker 7: now that includes partecting them from Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: Protecting I would like to think the job is to
Speaker 1: protect them from illegal alien truck drivers who are running
Speaker 1: into people on the road because he can't read the signs,
Speaker 1: but it's okay, go ahead.
Speaker 7: Protecting Californians also includes enforcing traffic laws, and we've seen
Speaker 7: sometimes a need for oversight in California. For example, we
Speaker 7: have seen that the Department of Motor Vehicles was not
Speaker 7: enforcing rules around DUIs and drivers who had convictions for that.
Speaker 7: I am stunned that mister Bianco would say to block
Speaker 7: and brown Californians and immigrants who are being terrorized and
Speaker 7: racially profiled that you have to get over racism. It's
Speaker 7: not something that you get over, it's something that you fight.
Speaker 7: And if he doesn't understand the importance of that, he
Speaker 7: has no business representing a state with it.
Speaker 1: So you see she goes on, it's all about the
Speaker 1: point of trying to stop people who don't speak English
Speaker 1: from getting commercial driver's license. The answer is that Trump
Speaker 1: is a racist.
Speaker 3: I'm just so confused because do they do something where
Speaker 3: they like beat you up and then at the end
Speaker 3: of the beating they say, do you speak English? And
Speaker 3: that's the way that they test for, like you know,
Speaker 3: whether you can have a driver's license to drive a truck?
Speaker 3: Like what is it like? Like I feel like if
Speaker 3: you just speak English, like you just tell them I
Speaker 3: speak English in English and like we're good.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, And is it about passing a test, like,
Speaker 1: because I mean you should be able to pass a test, right,
Speaker 1: I mean we all I got to pass a test
Speaker 1: to drive, like.
Speaker 3: So yeah, like when it raisedst when I took my
Speaker 3: driver's license test, Like I don't get it. Yeah, it's
Speaker 3: literally don't understand this conversation. But they feel like your.
Speaker 1: Whole philosophy they don't give an inch. They'll never give
Speaker 1: an inch. They don't They're not going to give Trump
Speaker 1: any victory. They're not going to give they're not going
Speaker 1: to knowledge any of our points are accurate. And that's
Speaker 1: where I feel like the system is really suffering. Here's
Speaker 1: a perfect example. They're talking homelessness.
Speaker 2: Now, what grade would you give him on homelessness? And what,
Speaker 2: if anything, would you do differently?
Speaker 3: You have sixty seconds.
Speaker 7: I'm a notoriously tough grader, but I would probably give.
Speaker 3: Him a bee on homelessness.
Speaker 7: I don't think this is ba an easy problem to solve,
Speaker 7: but I do give him a lot of credit for
Speaker 7: calling attention to the problem. When he campaigned eight years ago,
Speaker 7: he was talking about housing when nobody else was.
Speaker 3: Well.
Speaker 5: By the way, I'd love to be in your class, Katie,
Speaker 5: if you get a beef, what gavin you some?
Speaker 3: Still on homelesses? My goodness?
Speaker 1: And Javierbasira, who's also on the stage and is pulling
Speaker 1: under four percent. Former attorney general of the state, he
Speaker 1: gave newso An a homeless has gone up thirty something
Speaker 1: percent in California since he became the governor, and also
Speaker 1: or at least in LA I don't for the whole state,
Speaker 1: but overall it has gone up quite a bit. Everyone
Speaker 1: knows that California is super cool to the homeless. South
Speaker 1: Park laid it out a long time ago that this
Speaker 1: is the place to be and it ruins so many
Speaker 1: of the best neighborhoods. We've turned over so many of
Speaker 1: our parks, not to the children of the tax payers
Speaker 1: who the parks are intended for. There are just homeless
Speaker 1: encamp campments. I make this point so often I go
Speaker 1: into La into nice parts of town, and the parks
Speaker 1: or overrun by the homeless, and then I go to
Speaker 1: my little neighborhood in a suburb where there's a tiny
Speaker 1: little gate around the park because I pay my one
Speaker 1: hundred and seventy dollars a month to the HOA or
Speaker 1: whatever it is, and it is like, it's like a dream.
Speaker 1: It's like a dream for you to play with my
Speaker 1: children in the park without harassment, without a pot smell,
Speaker 1: and all of that is just we can do. That
Speaker 1: is not that hard, and we've elected to not do it.
Speaker 1: And this Democrat the worst grade the Democrats gave Gavenue
Speaker 1: and not homelessess is a B.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, let's say kat Katie Porter can't. She can't,
Speaker 3: she can't pull any threads on the homelessness industrial complex,
Speaker 3: or we're gonna find out that she, you know, maybe
Speaker 3: like pour its scalding water on her husband or something.
Speaker 1: So do you think though, there's any Democrat out there
Speaker 1: who is willing to at least say, hey, you know what,
Speaker 1: we didn't do well on homelessness.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's just the factor there. The math is there. Well,
Speaker 3: that's the thing is like for the group as a whole,
Speaker 3: Like I like to times Zoom, I didn't think about
Speaker 3: like the strategy just you know, you got to be
Speaker 3: an adult and kind of not be too idealistic and
Speaker 3: be a little real. There's always a strategy. So I
Speaker 3: see like that there's this huge open lane where the
Speaker 3: strategy for the group, for the establishment people can't be
Speaker 3: to ever say any of this stuff that we're talking
Speaker 3: about out loud. But given that reality, if there was
Speaker 3: embody who wanted to pull a Trump, you know, who
Speaker 3: wanted to kind of not have to rely on the establishment,
Speaker 3: who wanted to not you know, perform like horrific sex
Speaker 3: acts or some sort of strange abuse and have something
Speaker 3: that could be leveraged over them, but really be an
Speaker 3: honest person who is literally just trying to you know,
Speaker 3: advocate for people. And if they were a Democrat, they
Speaker 3: could do so much good. They could really do so
Speaker 3: much good. Unfortunately that that was the point of treating Trump.
Speaker 3: The way that he was treated was so that nobody
Speaker 3: would ever dare on the right or the left. And
Speaker 3: by the way, I would totally embrace any Democrats who
Speaker 3: wanted to do this. You know that nobody would dare
Speaker 3: to call out the ills and the missteps and the
Speaker 3: crimes in some cases, and the corruption of the establishment,
Speaker 3: especially in places like New York California where you have
Speaker 3: these deep, dark corruption swamp on so many things that
Speaker 3: matter so much, health, education, homelessness, public safety. There is
Speaker 3: such a big opportunity, but you can't do it because
Speaker 3: you'll get beat over the head.
Speaker 1: It's so right, and it's very scary, and I feel
Speaker 1: like that that's all we're asking. You don't agree with
Speaker 1: us on everything, We're happy to disagree. But what I
Speaker 1: am asking is that can we at least not take
Speaker 1: a homelessess problem that was bad and somehow got worse.
Speaker 1: It would have taken so little, just the smallest improvement,
Speaker 1: and you could have given them an a hey, it improved,
Speaker 1: it got worse. This isn't just that homelessness is not
Speaker 1: guaranteed to get worse. It's not one of these scenarios
Speaker 1: where things are inevitable going to get worse.
Speaker 3: It is one more. They act like it's a law
Speaker 3: of gravity, and it's not only not a lot of gravity,
Speaker 3: but there's a fix everything button. Yes, it's it's just
Speaker 3: improve it a little bit, a little bit.
Speaker 1: Don't make it so that so many my weekend days
Speaker 1: are ruined, so many neighborhoods are ruined.
Speaker 3: Whatever. It's a it's a look, we can improve it
Speaker 3: a lot. It's called it's called doing what is necessary,
Speaker 3: and we all know what it is. Arresting people, moving
Speaker 3: people off of the street, institutionalizing people who can't take
Speaker 3: care of themselves, who are clearly you know, there's there's
Speaker 3: a term for disturbed individuals. You know there's a fix
Speaker 3: everything button, nobody has the courage to press it.
Speaker 1: Doing what is Necessary would be a terrific name for
Speaker 1: a self help motivational podcast.
Speaker 3: Just a thought that consider. That's you know, that's me.
Speaker 3: I'm just I'm just miss miss warm and let's help people.
Speaker 1: And you're very you're very helpful. Okay, Emma Joe, final word?
Speaker 3: Anything else in your mind? No, I think I got
Speaker 3: my venting about the left out today. Wow.
Speaker 1: No, it's good. No, that's the point in the show.
Speaker 1: I would like to focus more on the left and
Speaker 1: the right if I can. All right, that's enough for now.
Speaker 1: Emma Joe, wonderful stuff. I'm where can people follow your work?
Speaker 3: Yeah, Emma Joe NYC on Twitter and the group chat
Speaker 3: on two Way on YouTube four pm on Thursdays.
Speaker 1: Good yeah, good content from her on the Everything app.
Speaker 1: And I'll try to remember to link up the your
Speaker 1: Your Canada investigation on the show notes if I.
Speaker 3: Can't rough to be in the bio Camala from Canada.
Speaker 3: Good thanks, IMS you next week. Thank you.